Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Cannabis Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Clearview retailers, residents urge county to revisit 10,000-foot cannabis buffer and reopen Hangar 420
Summary
Two public commenters told the Snohomish County Council a Clearview cannabis retailer has been closed for a year and that a 10,000-foot rural buffer was adopted without adequate transparency, costing the county tax revenue and local businesses.
Get email alerts on the Cannabis Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Two people who identified themselves during public comment on Wednesday urged the Snohomish County Council to address disparate outcomes from the county's rural buffer code and to act to reopen a closed cannabis retailer in Clearview.
Patrick Hahn, who identified himself as a Snohomish County resident and the owner of Hangar 420, said his Clearview store has been closed for a year. Hahn estimated the closure cost the county about $2,000,000 in cannabis tax revenue over the past 12 months; he extrapolated that figure to project roughly $10 million in lost tax receipts over five years with no growth, or more than $12.2 million assuming 10% annual growth. He also said the location represented 14 full-time jobs at roughly $25 per hour plus benefits (about $728,000 per year) and that approximately 80% of the products sold at the store are sourced from Snohomish County producers and processors.
"When the store is kept closed, it's not just my business that's impacted," Hahn said, urging the council and executive to advance the Cone amendment to restore what he called fairness under the code so his business and local vendors can resume operations.
Nick Gross, who said he lives in Clearview, urged transparency in how the rural buffer code was adopted. Gross said public records show communications between county staff and a private lobbyist representing a single cannabis operator and that a 10,000-foot buffer effectively eliminated viable retail zoning along Highway 9 by excluding otherwise available parcels, reshaping the corridor and limiting options for residents.
The comments were made during the public comment portion of the council meeting; councilmembers did not take action on the buffer during the session.
